JazzByTheBay
09-28 04:36 PM
Given the number of questions and concerns IV members have about AC21 in general and "what after EAD/AP", it makes sense to coordinate with USCIS (and lawmakers if required) on this and get some favorable responses that allay everyone's concerns.
If EAD+AP are like a "provisional GC", USCIS should perhaps not delve too much into the job description of work done after the 180 days past AOS filing, imo. Just as in the case of GCs, the bar of intent to be employed in that job is met by working for that employer for 90-180 days (the latter to be on the safe side). The only reason this is such a huge issue is because of the unreasonable waiting time induced on the GC process due to retrogression.
As a result, folks from retrogression-affected countries suffer from these anxities, whereas those from unaffected countries get their GCs, and are free birds after the 90-180 day period.
It's unreasonable to expect folks from retrogressed countries to be employed in the same position, or to otherwise limit their options by imposing restrictions of new job being the same job description as the one on the approved labor cert.
jazz
First there is not enough AC21 cases to give feed back how their 485s were handled (approved/detail of RFE/denied) due to job change. Becase, almost all guys who used ac21 still in waiting game due to retrogression.
The main thing what I see here is, USCIS has not yet published the final regulation to interpret AC21 act, even after 7 years of passing AC21 act. They are issuing internal field office memo. These memos are non-binding. In other words, one cannot firmly relay on memos or challange the USCIS decision on AC21 portability according to these memos.
However, sofar, these memos are very favorable to workers, including allowing self-employment, one can port even before 140 approval ect...However, USCIS were cautioning in each memos, that the final regulation may be restrictive than memos. If they took restrictive position in final regulation, it will be a huge problem for most peoples, as they might have violated the final regulation.
Another issue is, definition of "same or similar occupational classification". This is going to be very subjective based on how uscis adjudicator going to compare old and new jobs. The memo says by comparing job duties both old and new jobs and based on SOC or ONET code of old and new job they have to decide both jobs are same or similar. As there is no clear regulation it is big issue to go howmuch level of similarity between jobs. For example one guy may think "database administrator" and "network administrator" are similar job to port. The USCIS may think it may not. It is not quantified.
I feel IV should advocate on liberal/quantifyable defintion for similar jobs in AC21 interpretation. For example, all computer professional jobs should be considered as similar jobs as well as all engineering jobs should be considered similar to port. For example mining engineer can port to chemical engineer job etc...
Also, if any one port to self employment in similar job, there is no much information available wheter one should open a company in his/her name or not (by just working in 1099 etc.. for multiple positions). This needs to have a flexible option for workers, like one can work in 1099 w/o opening a bussiness.
Also, IV should advocate on not to have any restrictive interpretation in final regulation.
If EAD+AP are like a "provisional GC", USCIS should perhaps not delve too much into the job description of work done after the 180 days past AOS filing, imo. Just as in the case of GCs, the bar of intent to be employed in that job is met by working for that employer for 90-180 days (the latter to be on the safe side). The only reason this is such a huge issue is because of the unreasonable waiting time induced on the GC process due to retrogression.
As a result, folks from retrogression-affected countries suffer from these anxities, whereas those from unaffected countries get their GCs, and are free birds after the 90-180 day period.
It's unreasonable to expect folks from retrogressed countries to be employed in the same position, or to otherwise limit their options by imposing restrictions of new job being the same job description as the one on the approved labor cert.
jazz
First there is not enough AC21 cases to give feed back how their 485s were handled (approved/detail of RFE/denied) due to job change. Becase, almost all guys who used ac21 still in waiting game due to retrogression.
The main thing what I see here is, USCIS has not yet published the final regulation to interpret AC21 act, even after 7 years of passing AC21 act. They are issuing internal field office memo. These memos are non-binding. In other words, one cannot firmly relay on memos or challange the USCIS decision on AC21 portability according to these memos.
However, sofar, these memos are very favorable to workers, including allowing self-employment, one can port even before 140 approval ect...However, USCIS were cautioning in each memos, that the final regulation may be restrictive than memos. If they took restrictive position in final regulation, it will be a huge problem for most peoples, as they might have violated the final regulation.
Another issue is, definition of "same or similar occupational classification". This is going to be very subjective based on how uscis adjudicator going to compare old and new jobs. The memo says by comparing job duties both old and new jobs and based on SOC or ONET code of old and new job they have to decide both jobs are same or similar. As there is no clear regulation it is big issue to go howmuch level of similarity between jobs. For example one guy may think "database administrator" and "network administrator" are similar job to port. The USCIS may think it may not. It is not quantified.
I feel IV should advocate on liberal/quantifyable defintion for similar jobs in AC21 interpretation. For example, all computer professional jobs should be considered as similar jobs as well as all engineering jobs should be considered similar to port. For example mining engineer can port to chemical engineer job etc...
Also, if any one port to self employment in similar job, there is no much information available wheter one should open a company in his/her name or not (by just working in 1099 etc.. for multiple positions). This needs to have a flexible option for workers, like one can work in 1099 w/o opening a bussiness.
Also, IV should advocate on not to have any restrictive interpretation in final regulation.
wallpaper ganesh clip art free download.
GCStatus
09-15 04:17 PM
Thanks to all who have pledged so far for fighting against injustice.
To those who haven't yet, we are collecting pledges to file a lawsuit against USICS against these random and opaque processing of GC's. Our target is to get 1000 affected people to pledge atlaset $100 each so that we can fund this lawsuit. No money being collected right now..just honest pledges.
There is a current list of members who have pledged support on the link below.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pgWehhQEb3jqwsRC8fcKLTQ&hl=en#
If you would like to help in this effort, please send me a private message with the following info:
1) Ur IV handle
2) Ph#
3) Email ID
4) Amount you would like to pledge.
Please note, we will move forward only if we have atleast 1000 pledged members to make up a sound force behind this campaign. So unity is the key here. We will not collect money unless we have a solid proof that we are not alone in this fight.
More the better, again 1000 an approx number - Please free to contact man-woman-gc with personal details
To those who haven't yet, we are collecting pledges to file a lawsuit against USICS against these random and opaque processing of GC's. Our target is to get 1000 affected people to pledge atlaset $100 each so that we can fund this lawsuit. No money being collected right now..just honest pledges.
There is a current list of members who have pledged support on the link below.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pgWehhQEb3jqwsRC8fcKLTQ&hl=en#
If you would like to help in this effort, please send me a private message with the following info:
1) Ur IV handle
2) Ph#
3) Email ID
4) Amount you would like to pledge.
Please note, we will move forward only if we have atleast 1000 pledged members to make up a sound force behind this campaign. So unity is the key here. We will not collect money unless we have a solid proof that we are not alone in this fight.
More the better, again 1000 an approx number - Please free to contact man-woman-gc with personal details
bombaysardar
06-12 07:09 AM
Bump
2011 Happy Birthday Hello Kitty
grupak
11-22 09:36 AM
Mehul,
Sad to hear your situation. Greg Siskind has discussed some of the legal options on his blog http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
As others have suggested, if possible your spouse should pursue her own path to GC through H1B employer as a realistic option. IV members would help in the job search.
Wish you and your family all the best.
Sad to hear your situation. Greg Siskind has discussed some of the legal options on his blog http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
As others have suggested, if possible your spouse should pursue her own path to GC through H1B employer as a realistic option. IV members would help in the job search.
Wish you and your family all the best.
more...
hpandey
07-20 05:07 PM
IV could not even collect 20K in the Washington DC drive. I hardly saw EB3 folks contributing (based on my observation, I might be wrong so take it easy). If every EB3 person contributes 50USD, it will be enough to run a campaign. Action is the key, not posting in forums. Hope we get out of this EB2 vs EB3 and as focus on visa recapture.
I am EB3 and I contributed to every IV campaign including the last DC advocacy. Just because all IV efforts end up helping only EB2 does not mean EB3 people do not contribute or participate in advocacy efforts. Its just that no one wants to hear about EB3 whether it be USCIS or anyone else. :mad:
I am EB3 and I contributed to every IV campaign including the last DC advocacy. Just because all IV efforts end up helping only EB2 does not mean EB3 people do not contribute or participate in advocacy efforts. Its just that no one wants to hear about EB3 whether it be USCIS or anyone else. :mad:
anzerraja
07-19 07:55 PM
Could you please let us know hwo to do it ?
Try to make the Post Sticky
Try to make the Post Sticky
more...
NWISE
11-17 03:06 PM
Thanks for the effort! As always, it's greatly appreciated.
2010 pictures Happy Birthday Hello
baba2s
07-16 08:18 PM
If u want to be fair, fight to remove country quota and not fight among EB categories
I agree with you vin13, remove country quota or by number of years we are legally here in US.
Base on PD is not fare enough. Many of us filed GC vary late because of one or many reasons.
I agree with you vin13, remove country quota or by number of years we are legally here in US.
Base on PD is not fare enough. Many of us filed GC vary late because of one or many reasons.
more...
eb3_nepa
05-02 11:33 AM
Ragz thanks for removing the unnecessary quotes :)
hair Free Party Clipart – Birthday
apb
09-15 04:45 PM
We paid money and asking for proper transparent service. There are so many inconsistencies about the way USCIS/DOS operate and utter lack of transparency in case handling. Added to this the process is complicated forcing us to spend $$ with lawyers. If I am paying money I need to know how USCIS is going to give me the service. And once known, USCIS should make it transparent so I know that they are sticking with it. THere was an excellent compilation that I saw few days back about the inefficiencies in USCIS.
We cannot accept that they have 1million application and so they are faltering. If they cannot handle that many why take $$ from us. They could had streamlined resources/applications, etc.. but why is it my problem. I have been lawful and following all the rules. Now when will it ever be USCIS/DOS turn? Investing 10 + years in US and going back is not acceptable...
We cannot accept that they have 1million application and so they are faltering. If they cannot handle that many why take $$ from us. They could had streamlined resources/applications, etc.. but why is it my problem. I have been lawful and following all the rules. Now when will it ever be USCIS/DOS turn? Investing 10 + years in US and going back is not acceptable...
more...
dingudi
02-18 11:07 AM
I am assuming you guys saw this:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/USCISUpdate(biometricchanges)(17Feb08).pdf
USCIS will consolidate FPs for 485 and EADs. So if we don't receive biometrics for 485, hopefully we will get one for EAD renewal which will also serve the purpose for 485 processing.
Note: This only applies to concurrent filers of 485 and EAD.
Apahilaj,
Yes I saw that but mine was not concurrent filing. I applied for EAD couple of months after I-485 filing and have also received the EAD.Still waiting for FP though.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/USCISUpdate(biometricchanges)(17Feb08).pdf
USCIS will consolidate FPs for 485 and EADs. So if we don't receive biometrics for 485, hopefully we will get one for EAD renewal which will also serve the purpose for 485 processing.
Note: This only applies to concurrent filers of 485 and EAD.
Apahilaj,
Yes I saw that but mine was not concurrent filing. I applied for EAD couple of months after I-485 filing and have also received the EAD.Still waiting for FP though.
hot Happy Birthday Hello Kitty
another one
12-17 05:22 PM
That's what happens after tippoing point is reached. But there are numerous paths to the tipping point. I wouldn't attempt on generalizing them.
(like book tickets, find a job back home, etc... )[/I].
jazz
(like book tickets, find a job back home, etc... )[/I].
jazz
more...
house Birthday Balloons Clipart
Macaca
07-09 11:25 AM
it says nothing about who can file an application.
it only says the "status may be adjusted" IF.....
Based on a quick scan of the above documents (which may not be a complete list of documents on AOS), I did not find a single reference to LAW that specifies when AOSs can (not) be submittted by GC applicants. My guess is that there is no such law That is why AILA is calling it rubbish.
I urge everyone to scan these (and othet documents) for LAW that specifies when AOSs can (not) be submittted by GC applicants.
it only says the "status may be adjusted" IF.....
Based on a quick scan of the above documents (which may not be a complete list of documents on AOS), I did not find a single reference to LAW that specifies when AOSs can (not) be submittted by GC applicants. My guess is that there is no such law That is why AILA is calling it rubbish.
I urge everyone to scan these (and othet documents) for LAW that specifies when AOSs can (not) be submittted by GC applicants.
tattoo 2010 Birthday Cake Clip Art
rama2007
11-17 06:52 PM
Done
more...
pictures hello kitty and friends
doshhar
07-07 02:38 PM
I have initiated the similar discussions on Murthy. Please take a look this thread and reply to that thread.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=1474093861&m=6341054251
We should do something and this is the right way to show our unity.
We can also gather students from different universities (as they will going to suffer the same pain as us).
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=1474093861&m=6341054251
We should do something and this is the right way to show our unity.
We can also gather students from different universities (as they will going to suffer the same pain as us).
dresses Free Vector Hello Kitty
desi3933
06-28 07:08 AM
A note to my fellow IV members - I am not after the $42/Hr job. Good luck in finding a US citizen to do this job. I was wrong about EEO, it is actually IRCA which prohibits discrimination in recruitment and hiring.
Best Practices for hiring workers from Department of Justice (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/htm/best_practices.htm)
Thanks, Walking_Dude, for putting this link.
As per web page on this link -Do allow all employees (including non-U.S. citizens) to provide any permissible documents to establish their identity or work authorization during the employment verification process.This will exclude applicants on H-1B visa status as they don't have work authorization to work for the new employer.
However, as I said before, Employer can not discriminate between GC holder, EAD, and OPT holder.
.
Best Practices for hiring workers from Department of Justice (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/htm/best_practices.htm)
Thanks, Walking_Dude, for putting this link.
As per web page on this link -Do allow all employees (including non-U.S. citizens) to provide any permissible documents to establish their identity or work authorization during the employment verification process.This will exclude applicants on H-1B visa status as they don't have work authorization to work for the new employer.
However, as I said before, Employer can not discriminate between GC holder, EAD, and OPT holder.
.
more...
makeup hello kitty clipart, hello
stuckinmuck
05-28 02:12 PM
A Great New Commission
May 27, 2007
An Open Letter to:
The United States Senate
The United States House of Representatives
Re: A Great New Commission
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Our nation holds paramount equal treatment under the law. My principal question is, what federal laws may I break so that I am rewarded with amnesty to the tune of $18,000 per year?
That would bring me parity with the estimated costs to society of illegal aliens. These are in health, education and related social benefits. Oh, and the approximately 30 percent of our prison population which is comprised of some of these aliens. Seems some of the cost is borne by victims who are assaulted by aliens doing the crimes Americans just won�t do.
I�ll even give you a bargain. As a small business owner, my real and opportunity costs to comply with federal statutes and regulations are substantial. These are not taxes, they are non-deductible costs I incur to comply with federal law. My daughter�s chronic medical condition and my own heart condition also incur substantial expenses. Regarding our health, my family is uninsurable due to these conditions. We have never received assistance under any state or federal programs.
All of these costs come to something over $27,000 per year. So, when you give me my amnesty and my $18,000 per year, you will fall short of my expenses by approximately $9,000. Since you are wise in the ways of federal accounting, you can inform your constituents that you have in fact saved $9,000 per year, in addition to the moral claim of having granted me amnesty.
It will be appropriate to consider that in fairness my children should be due anchor amnesty. This from the fact that they still will be my dependents when you soon grant me amnesty. If you delay, well, my daughter will always be my dependent.
Considering possible delays, especially since fellow citizens will have their own tailored amnesty petitions, I understand if you need to charter a Federal Amnesty Commission. That is sure to renew respect for and compliance with the laws you draft. Any shortfall in compliance, up to say, twelve million offenses, you could graciously accept as appropriate civil disobedience. After all, that would assure you more press time as we enter this latest election cycle.
You are wise also in federal laws which may be broken with no consequence. I am too busy supporting my family, you, and the twelve million scofflaws and their employers to understand such matters, so I need your guidance. You know where I live, my drivers license number, my social security number, my bank and credit account numbers, as well as my email, internet service provider, taxpayer identification number, mortgage holder, business licenses and telephone numbers.
Please contact me soon. Given the rising medical and other costs, I need that $18,000 quickly and retroactive to the enactment date of S.1348. It�s only fair.
Cordially,
<First Name> <Last Name>
May 27, 2007
An Open Letter to:
The United States Senate
The United States House of Representatives
Re: A Great New Commission
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Our nation holds paramount equal treatment under the law. My principal question is, what federal laws may I break so that I am rewarded with amnesty to the tune of $18,000 per year?
That would bring me parity with the estimated costs to society of illegal aliens. These are in health, education and related social benefits. Oh, and the approximately 30 percent of our prison population which is comprised of some of these aliens. Seems some of the cost is borne by victims who are assaulted by aliens doing the crimes Americans just won�t do.
I�ll even give you a bargain. As a small business owner, my real and opportunity costs to comply with federal statutes and regulations are substantial. These are not taxes, they are non-deductible costs I incur to comply with federal law. My daughter�s chronic medical condition and my own heart condition also incur substantial expenses. Regarding our health, my family is uninsurable due to these conditions. We have never received assistance under any state or federal programs.
All of these costs come to something over $27,000 per year. So, when you give me my amnesty and my $18,000 per year, you will fall short of my expenses by approximately $9,000. Since you are wise in the ways of federal accounting, you can inform your constituents that you have in fact saved $9,000 per year, in addition to the moral claim of having granted me amnesty.
It will be appropriate to consider that in fairness my children should be due anchor amnesty. This from the fact that they still will be my dependents when you soon grant me amnesty. If you delay, well, my daughter will always be my dependent.
Considering possible delays, especially since fellow citizens will have their own tailored amnesty petitions, I understand if you need to charter a Federal Amnesty Commission. That is sure to renew respect for and compliance with the laws you draft. Any shortfall in compliance, up to say, twelve million offenses, you could graciously accept as appropriate civil disobedience. After all, that would assure you more press time as we enter this latest election cycle.
You are wise also in federal laws which may be broken with no consequence. I am too busy supporting my family, you, and the twelve million scofflaws and their employers to understand such matters, so I need your guidance. You know where I live, my drivers license number, my social security number, my bank and credit account numbers, as well as my email, internet service provider, taxpayer identification number, mortgage holder, business licenses and telephone numbers.
Please contact me soon. Given the rising medical and other costs, I need that $18,000 quickly and retroactive to the enactment date of S.1348. It�s only fair.
Cordially,
<First Name> <Last Name>
girlfriend Cowboy Birthday Party Clip Art
iak1973
02-17 11:17 AM
Just contributed $50 using paypal
Your transaction ID for this payment is: 24209705S98757631
Your transaction ID for this payment is: 24209705S98757631
hairstyles Hello Kitty 1st irthday cake
GCBy3000
05-23 11:50 AM
Sent to all the senators listed and two from my state.
jamesbond007
11-18 12:20 PM
Summary page said it went to my district's Congressman Pat Tiberi and to the two Ohio Senators.
pappu
11-19 04:23 PM
Question to IV core...
After receiving the standard email respose from the congressman/senator...I am wondering are they even aware about the legal immigrants. All we are getting the standard template which is talking about only illegals and DREAM.
No mention about legals ?
Please read my earlier responses on this thread. We need to now take up this issue further and tell them we did not get satisfactory response and need serious attention to our issue as a constituent.
After receiving the standard email respose from the congressman/senator...I am wondering are they even aware about the legal immigrants. All we are getting the standard template which is talking about only illegals and DREAM.
No mention about legals ?
Please read my earlier responses on this thread. We need to now take up this issue further and tell them we did not get satisfactory response and need serious attention to our issue as a constituent.
No comments:
Post a Comment